KOSDAQ Tech Listing: 4 New Categories, 30M Won Fee [2026]

Korea Exchange said on October 19, 2026 that it is rewriting the evaluation rules behind KOSDAQ’s technology special listing track, the route that lets money-losing technology companies go public without first proving a profit. The revision adds semiconductor design and intellectual property, cybersecurity, aerospace, and robotics as standalone technology categories, expands the expert panel that grades applicants from four members to six, and sets new evaluation fees of 30 million won for domestic companies and 35 million won for foreign applicants.

The announcement, reported by Chosun Biz, lands at a moment when Seoul policymakers are trying to steer more chip, aerospace, and robotics startups toward public capital rather than private funding rounds or overseas listings. KRX plans to collect industry feedback and finalize the framework by the end of 2026, with the improved evaluation system scheduled to start operating after the second quarter of 2027.

Google · Preferred Sources

Don't miss new tech stories on Google

Add TrendinTech once in the Google app and our stories appear in your news suggestions.

Add Now

What Korea Exchange Actually Announced

The core of the plan keeps a structure KOSDAQ applicants already know: a two-part grading system split into an industry module and a technology module. Companies pick the industry category that matches their business, then get scored on the technology module tied to what they actually build. That division survives the overhaul intact, according to Seoul Economic Daily.

What changes is the menu of technology fields a company can be evaluated against. Four new fields join the technology module: semiconductor design and IP, cybersecurity, aerospace, and robotics. At the same time, KRX is reorganizing older categories, including artificial intelligence, big data, and immersive content, which have been grouped under the technology-special-listing umbrella for years but had started to blur together as more applicants claimed overlapping expertise.

Companies will still be able to select multiple industry and technology modules depending on how their business actually operates, rather than being locked into a single box. KRX is pairing that flexibility with a new industry checklist designed to stop applicants from dodging the categories that actually apply to them, or picking a technology field that flatters their pitch rather than describing their product.

Semiconductor Design and IP Finally Gets Its Own Lane

Fabless chip designers and IP licensing shops have historically had to squeeze into broader technology categories that were not built with them in mind, forcing reviewers to improvise criteria for a sector with its own patent dynamics, foundry dependencies, and multi-year qualification cycles. Giving semiconductor design and IP a dedicated technology module means evaluators can finally apply standards built around how chip startups actually generate value, from tapeout milestones to licensing revenue, rather than retrofitting criteria meant for software companies.

That matters because Korea’s chip ecosystem is not just Samsung and SK hynix anymore. A growing layer of smaller design houses sits underneath the memory giants, and many of them have struggled to get a fair hearing under evaluation frameworks tuned for hardware manufacturers rather than IP-first businesses. The dedicated module gives those companies a clearer evaluation lane heading into a market where Samsung’s move to tap TSMC’s 3nm lines for Nvidia’s next HBM base die shows how tightly Korean and Taiwanese chip supply chains are already intertwined.

Aerospace and Robotics Join the List

Aerospace and robotics are the two additions likely to draw the most attention from founders and investors, because both sectors have long product-development timelines that clash with how public markets typically expect to see revenue. A satellite propulsion startup or a humanoid robotics firm can spend years validating hardware before booking meaningful sales, which is exactly the profile the technology special listing track was built to accommodate in the first place.

Until now, aerospace and robotics applicants were evaluated under adjacent categories that did not map cleanly onto what they build. A propulsion company might have been graded alongside general manufacturing applicants, while a robotics firm could end up compared against software-heavy AI companies. Standalone modules let KRX apply sector-specific technical criteria, which outlets including Invest Chosun describe as the point of the whole redesign: matching evaluation criteria to what a company actually sells rather than what box happens to be available.

The timing lines up with a broader run of aerospace manufacturing news out of the region. China’s Huosheng Aerospace landing a 200-ton rocket engine deal in Ningbo is a reminder that Asian aerospace supply chains are scaling fast, and Korean regulators appear determined not to leave domestic propulsion and satellite companies stuck using a listing framework that was never designed for them.

Technology module field	Status before the revision	Status after the revision
Artificial intelligence (AI)	Standalone technology category	Reorganized within updated module structure
Big data	Standalone technology category	Reorganized within updated module structure
Immersive content	Standalone technology category	Reorganized within updated module structure
Semiconductor design and IP	Not a dedicated category	New standalone technology module
Cybersecurity	Not a dedicated category	New standalone technology module
Aerospace	Not a dedicated category	New standalone technology module
Robotics	Not a dedicated category	New standalone technology module

The Evaluation Panel Grows From Four to Six

Alongside the new categories, KRX is expanding the specialized evaluation advisory panel from four members to six. The current panel leans heavily academic and legal: three Ph.D. holders and one patent attorney. The two additional seats will bring in expertise from industry or commercialization backgrounds, meaning people who have actually built, scaled, or sold a technology business rather than only studied or litigated one.

That shift reflects a recurring complaint about technology special listing reviews: academic reviewers are well-suited to judging whether an underlying technology is sound, but can struggle to assess whether a business model built on that technology can actually survive contact with a market. Adding commercialization-focused panelists is KRX’s answer to that gap, and it is a change the exchange’s own leadership has framed as central to the credibility of the whole system.

Min Kyungwook, Vice President of the KOSDAQ Market Division at Korea Exchange, said the technology special listing system “has delivered results, including becoming a major listing track,” but added that “efforts from all market participants are needed to address the KOSDAQ market discount,” and that KRX “will provide all necessary support to strengthen the credibility and expertise of the professional evaluation system, the first gateway to a technology-special listing,” according to The Asia Business Daily.

Why the Panel Mix Matters for Founders

For a founder preparing a listing application, the composition of the evaluation panel is not a bureaucratic footnote. It determines what kind of evidence actually moves the needle. A panel weighted toward patent attorneys and doctoral researchers tends to reward technical depth on paper: publications, patents, and peer-reviewed validation. A panel that also includes people who have run a commercialization effort is more likely to probe go-to-market plans, customer pipelines, and unit economics. Expanding the panel to six members, with two new seats reserved for that commercial lens, changes what founders need to prepare before they walk into an evaluation.

New Fees: 30 Million Won Domestic, 35 Million Won Foreign

KRX also set planned evaluation fees under the revised framework: 30 million won for domestic companies and 35 million won for foreign companies applying through the technology special listing track. The gap between domestic and foreign fees reflects the added administrative work of evaluating a company incorporated outside Korea, from translating technical documentation to coordinating with the applicant’s home-market regulators.

To help applicants clear that bar without repeated rejections and re-filings, KRX said it will provide a standard technology-business-plan table of contents, writing guidance, a frequently-asked-questions resource, and a submission-document checklist in advance. That is a direct response to a persistent complaint from founders and underwriters: that the technology special listing application process has historically been opaque about exactly what reviewers expect to see, leading to wasted cycles on applications that get bounced for formatting or completeness issues rather than substantive technology gaps.

Element	Before the revision	After the revision
Advisory panel size	Four members	Six members
Panel composition	Three Ph.D. holders, one patent attorney	Adds two seats for industry/commercialization expertise
Domestic company evaluation fee	Not standardized at this level	30 million won
Foreign company evaluation fee	Not standardized at this level	35 million won
Disclosure cadence for evaluators	No fixed schedule specified	Every six months
Re-evaluation trigger	Not formally codified	Only when a result-affecting error is confirmed

Disclosure Rules Tighten for Evaluation Institutions

One of the less flashy but arguably more consequential pieces of the overhaul targets the evaluation institutions themselves, not the companies applying for a listing. Profit-making specialized evaluation institutions will now be required to disclose their internal-control implementation and any profit-making engagements on their own websites every six months. That is a transparency measure aimed at a structural tension in the system: the firms grading whether a company’s technology deserves a public listing can also have commercial relationships with applicants or their advisors, and KRX wants that potential conflict visible rather than buried.

KRX is pairing the disclosure requirement with formal dispute-resolution procedures for evaluation results, something the current framework has handled on a more ad hoc basis. Re-evaluation will now only be permitted when an error that actually affected the result is confirmed, which sets a higher bar than a company simply disagreeing with its score, while still giving legitimately mis-evaluated applicants a documented path to a second look.

The Timeline: Finalized by Year-End, Live After Mid-2027

KRX is not implementing these changes immediately. The exchange said it plans to collect industry opinions and finalize the revised framework by the end of 2026, a deadline reported consistently across News1 and other outlets covering the announcement. The improved evaluation framework is then expected to begin operating after the second quarter of 2027, giving companies, underwriters, and the evaluation institutions themselves roughly two quarters to adjust internal processes once the final rules are locked in.

That gap between finalization and go-live matters for any company currently working through its own technology special listing preparation. A startup deep into due diligence under the existing four-category technology module structure will likely want clarity from its underwriters on whether to push for a filing before the new framework takes effect, or wait and apply under categories built specifically for what it does.

Why Robotics Needed Its Own Category

The decision to carve out robotics as its own technology module is backed by a market that has been quietly scaling for years. South Korea had 1,012 installed manufacturing robots per 10,000 manufacturing workers in 2023, one of the highest robot-density figures anywhere in the world, according to the International Federation of Robotics’ World Robotics 2024 report. That density grew at an average of 5% annually between 2018 and 2023, and South Korea accounted for 5.8% of the global manufacturing robot market in 2023, ranking fourth worldwide.

Korea’s manufacturing robot market itself grew from 2.86 trillion won in 2020 to roughly 3.1 trillion won in 2024, an average annual growth rate of about 2.1%, according to figures compiled by Invest Korea citing IFR data. Those numbers help explain why regulators concluded that robotics companies pursuing a KOSDAQ listing deserved evaluation criteria built around their sector rather than a borrowed framework meant for AI software or general-purpose hardware applicants.

Metric	Figure	Source
Robot density, 2023	1,012 robots per 10,000 manufacturing workers	International Federation of Robotics
Annual density growth, 2018 to 2023	Average 5% per year	International Federation of Robotics
Global manufacturing robot market share, 2023	5.8%, ranked fourth worldwide	International Federation of Robotics
Korea manufacturing robot market, 2020	2.86 trillion won	Invest Korea, citing IFR data
Korea manufacturing robot market, 2024	Approximately 3.1 trillion won	Invest Korea, citing IFR data
Market CAGR, 2020 to 2024	Approximately 2.1%	Invest Korea, citing IFR data

Historical Context: From a Niche Workaround to 300 Tech-Listed Companies

The technology special listing track exists because a strict profitability requirement would have kept many of Korea’s most important technology companies off public markets entirely. It lets companies list on KOSDAQ based on the strength of their technology and growth potential rather than current earnings, with the evaluation panel acting as the gatekeeper that decides whether a company’s technology claims hold up. KRX reported in September 2026 that it had reached 300 companies listed through the technology special track, a milestone reached partly through earlier eligibility expansions such as broadening target industries, introducing single-technology evaluations, and applying grace periods for delisting specifically to technology-listed firms since July of that year.

That history is the backdrop against which this latest revision should be read. It is not a one-off tweak but the next step in a pattern of incremental loosening and refinement that KRX has pursued as the track has grown from a niche workaround into a major listing channel. The addition of four new technology modules, a bigger panel, and codified dispute procedures all build on groundwork the exchange has been laying for several years.

How KOSDAQ’s Track Compares With Other Markets

Korea is not alone in trying to solve the problem of letting unprofitable, technically ambitious companies reach public markets. Hong Kong built Chapter 18A of its listing rules specifically for pre-revenue biotech companies, later extending similar accommodations to other specialist technology sectors. Shanghai’s STAR Market was designed from the outset to welcome loss-making hard-tech companies in semiconductors and biotech. Nasdaq has long allowed companies to list without profitability, leaning instead on disclosure and market discipline rather than a dedicated technical evaluation panel.

What distinguishes KOSDAQ’s approach is the degree of hands-on technical gatekeeping involved. Rather than leaving the judgment of whether a company’s technology is credible entirely to underwriters and investors, KRX inserts a panel of named experts who directly evaluate the claims before a listing can proceed. Expanding that panel and giving it sector-specific modules for chips, aerospace, cybersecurity, and robotics pushes Korea further in the direction of specialized, hands-on technical review, rather than toward the lighter-touch, disclosure-based model that exchanges like Nasdaq favor.

Market Impact: Who Benefits First

The companies most likely to benefit immediately are small and mid-sized Korean chip design houses, satellite and propulsion startups, and robotics firms that have struggled to fit into the prior four-category structure. For underwriters and venture investors backing these companies, a dedicated evaluation lane reduces a specific kind of execution risk: the chance that a strong technology gets graded poorly simply because reviewers lacked the right framework to assess it.

There is a broader capital-markets angle too. Korea has been trying to keep more of its chip and hardware ecosystem anchored to domestic listings rather than losing promising companies to private acquisition or a listing abroad. The same week this revision was reported, DayOne Data Centers’ IPO filing showed how much investor appetite exists right now for infrastructure-heavy technology listings across Asia, and a fresh wave of funding into Indian AI startups is a reminder that capital is actively chasing technology companies across the region. A more credible, better-staffed KOSDAQ evaluation process is partly Korea’s answer to that competition for listings.

There is also a chip-geopolitics dimension. With Nvidia’s China market share falling as Huawei gains ground, Korean policymakers have extra incentive to make sure domestic semiconductor design firms, not just the memory giants, have a credible path to growth capital at home rather than depending entirely on foreign investors or acquisition by larger players.

Risks and Open Questions

New categories and a bigger panel do not automatically solve the underlying tension in technology special listings: balancing access to capital for genuinely promising but unprofitable companies against the risk of waving through businesses whose technology claims do not hold up once they are public. Min Kyungwook’s own framing, that the system needs to address the “KOSDAQ market discount,” points to a persistent problem where technology-listed stocks have traded at a discount to peers, suggesting investors have not always trusted the evaluation process to filter out weak applicants.

It also remains unclear exactly how KRX will handle aerospace and robotics companies whose technology spans multiple new categories, such as a robotics firm building satellite-servicing hardware that could plausibly sit under both the new aerospace and robotics modules. The ability to select multiple technology modules is meant to address exactly that kind of overlap, but the industry checklist KRX is introducing to prevent companies from gaming category selection will need to be specific enough to handle genuinely hybrid businesses without becoming a bureaucratic trap.

What to Watch Before the Rules Go Live

Whether KRX publishes the specific technical criteria for each new module, semiconductor design and IP, cybersecurity, aerospace, and robotics, before or after the framework is finalized by year-end 2026.
Who fills the two new industry and commercialization seats on the six-member evaluation panel, and whether their backgrounds skew toward chips, aerospace, or robotics specifically.
Whether the 30 million won domestic and 35 million won foreign evaluation fees stay fixed once the framework takes effect after the second quarter of 2027, or get adjusted during the public feedback period.
How many companies file under the new semiconductor design and IP module in its first year, which will be the clearest early signal of whether the category was genuinely needed.
Whether the six-month disclosure requirement for profit-making evaluation institutions changes how underwriters select which evaluation firm to recommend to clients.

Each of these will shape whether the revision actually moves the needle on Korea’s technology-listing pipeline, or ends up being a structural change that looks significant on paper but changes little about which companies actually make it to market. Given KRX’s own acknowledgment that the current system has struggled with a market discount on technology-listed stocks, the credibility of the newly expanded panel will likely be judged on results within the first year or two after the framework goes live.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is KOSDAQ’s technology special listing track?

It is a listing route on Korea’s KOSDAQ market that allows technology companies to go public based on an evaluation of their technology and growth potential rather than current profitability, with the application graded across an industry module and a technology module.

What exactly did Korea Exchange announce on October 19, 2026?

KRX announced it is revising the evaluation standards for the technology special listing track, adding semiconductor design and IP, cybersecurity, aerospace, and robotics as new technology-module fields, expanding the expert evaluation panel from four to six members, and setting new evaluation fees.

Why did KRX add aerospace and robotics as separate categories?

Aerospace and robotics companies were previously evaluated under categories not built for their technical profile, forcing panels to apply criteria designed for other sectors. Dedicated modules let evaluators judge these companies against standards relevant to their actual products.

How much will the new evaluation cost companies?

KRX has set planned evaluation fees of 30 million won for domestic companies and 35 million won for foreign companies applying through the technology special listing track.

When will the new rules take effect?

KRX plans to finalize the framework after collecting industry feedback by the end of 2026. The improved evaluation system is scheduled to begin operating after the second quarter of 2027.

Can a company still apply under the old categories right now?

The announcement covers a planned framework still being finalized, and KRX has not published a cutover date beyond stating the improved system starts after the second quarter of 2027. Companies currently in the application process should confirm timing directly with their underwriters.

What happens if a company disputes its evaluation result?

KRX is codifying formal dispute-resolution procedures for evaluation results. Re-evaluation will only be permitted once an error confirmed to have affected the result is identified, rather than on a simple disagreement with the score.

How does this compare with how other exchanges handle unprofitable tech companies?

Hong Kong’s Chapter 18A and Shanghai’s STAR Market both carve out room for pre-revenue technology companies, while Nasdaq relies more on disclosure than a dedicated technical panel. KOSDAQ’s model stands out for using a named expert panel to directly evaluate technology claims before a listing can proceed, a structure this revision expands rather than replaces.

KOSDAQ Expands Tech Listing Rules: Panel Grows to 6 [2026]